@Olasejoe Fear of death isn’t proof of God. Nigerians shouting “Jesus” in danger reflects religious conditioning, not evidence of an afterlife. Panic reveals what people were taught to believe, not necessarily what is true.
@Solomonzikel Calling atheists spiritually blind is just a convenient way to dismiss questions you cannot answer. You cannot use the Holy Spirit as evidence for God’s existence when the existence of that same Spirit is what needs to be established.
@samueleyekosi Atheism doesn’t automatically make anyone smarter, but questioning inherited beliefs, demanding evidence and refusing to accept claims blindly are habits of intellectual growth.
@charlesgod30064@instablog9ja You’re confusing the existence of answers within a religious tradition with independent evidence that those answers are actually correct. A question being answered by theology doesn’t mean it has been proven by evidence.
@charlesgod30064@instablog9ja And nobody should accept a professor’s claims blindly either; that’s precisely the point. Science encourages questioning, testing and correcting established ideas. Why should the Bible be exempt from the same scrutiny?
@instablog9ja If Christianity claims to possess absolute truth, it should be able to defend that truth without silencing questions. Truth doesn’t need intimidation to survive.
@instablog9ja The Bible is a collection of ancient human writings, shaped by history, translation, interpretation and institutions that have often used religion to influence, control and manipulate people. Calling something sacred doesn’t make it immune to scrutiny.
@Morris_Monye@Wizarab10 Life is spiritual true! But sometimes the circumstances is different, the lady right there may have seen something or heard something ! Humans are wicked!
@r2kizzmusic@Ozedikus If your God is truly the ultimate truth, surely his existence shouldn’t depend on how many people believe in him or how loudly they argue about him.
@r2kizzmusic@Ozedikus And if Jesus being debated today proves his superiority, does that mean every widely debated religious figure is equally divine? You’re mistaking historical dominance for evidence of divine authority.